Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Co-Existence Options of Marine Renewable Energy Projects in Japan
Next Article in Special Issue
A Text Mining Approach for Sustainable Performance in the Film Industry
Previous Article in Journal
Gas Production from Gas Condensate Reservoirs Using Sustainable Environmentally Friendly Chemicals
Previous Article in Special Issue
Evolution and Transformation of the Central Place Theory in E-Business: China’s C2C Online Game Marketing
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 11
Issue 10
10.3390/su11102839
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Research Challenges in Digital Marketing: Sustainability

by
Francisco Diez-Martin
*,
Alicia Blanco-Gonzalez
and
Camilo Prado-Roman
Department of Business Economics, Rey Juan Carlos University, Paseo de los Artilleros S/N, 28032 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(10), 2839; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102839
Submission received: 22 February 2019 / Revised: 29 April 2019 / Accepted: 15 May 2019 / Published: 18 May 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Digital Marketing for Sustainable Growth: Business Models and Online Campaigns using Sustainable Strategies)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Great progress has been made in the field of marketing and sustainability. Nevertheless, there is still an important gap between the behavior and beliefs of society and markets about sustainability, and companies’ capability to understand and face this trend. Digital marketing is key to filling this gap. However, research in digital marketing and sustainability is very scarce. The purpose of this research is to examine the literature in the subject, since 2009 until 2018, and to elaborate a research agenda about digital marketing and sustainability. Through a previous analysis based on bibliometrics, a research agenda has been developed that shows the main challenges for the digital marketing and sustainability field: (1) customer orientation and value proposition; (2) digital consumer’s behavior; (3) digital green marketing; (4) competitive advantage; (5) supply chain; and (6) capabilities. This work contributes to the development of the research in digital marketing and sustainability, suggesting various challenges for the field that lead to future lines of research, and favoring the development of a new research approach capable of reducing the existing gap between society and business on sustainability issues.

1. Introduction

Internet is one of the main drivers of the increasing gap between markets and companies [1] and one of the biggest challenges for marketing [2]. Digital marketing has transformed the way companies manage and communicate with their customers and society worldwide. It is becoming a key and necessary instrument to face the challenges that still exist in the field of marketing.
At the same time, sustainability has transformed into one of the biggest challenges for companies since the beginning of 21th century, particularly for marketers [3]. The discussion between marketing and sustainability has been widely treated by researchers [4,5], resulting in the fact that both concepts have mutual things to offer each other. Sustainability favors the obtaining of improvements in the supply chain, the differentiation of products, access to aware investors, or a bigger commitment of the employees [4]. In turn, marketing allows greater behavioral comprehension of the clients and a tool to influence society’s attitudes and beliefs [4].
Great progress has been made in the field of marketing and sustainability. This progress was sustained in more than 2000 publications, between 1990 and 2018, with more than 30,500 citations altogether from the Web of Science Core Collection. Specifically, those papers were included on the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). Several issues have been examined: socially-concerned consumers [6,7], environmental advertising [8], ecological and societal marketing [9,10], socially responsible marketing [11,12], green marketing advertising and strategy [13,14], sustainable marketing and development [14], green supply chain management [15]. Nevertheless, there is still an important gap between the behavior and beliefs of society and markets about sustainability, and the companies capability to understand and face this trend. Digital marketing can turn into a key tool to help to mitigate this gap [1]. For example, it has been demonstrated that the union of digital marketing and sustainability reduces risk, uncertainty and distrust in online shopping [16]. However, research in digital marketing and sustainability is very scarce.
The purpose of this research is to examine literature in the subject since 2009 until 2018, and to elaborate a research agenda about digital marketing and sustainability. This work contributes to the development of research in digital marketing and sustainability, suggesting various challenges for the field that lead to future lines of research, and favoring the development of a new research approach capable of reducing the existing gap between society and business on sustainability issues.
In order to tackle the challenges that offers the sustainability field from a marketing digital position, this research relies on bibliometrics. Bibliometric techniques are particularly recommendable for this kind of purposes. Bibliometrics allow to recognize and display the intellectual and dynamic structure of a field of knowledge [17]. Furthermore, they introduce quantitative rigor to the obtained results and also reduce the subjectivity of the researcher [18].
The work is organized as follows. In the next section the methodology is shown. The use of co-citations is justified, and the origin of the data is also specified. The bigger section is the results. Questions about the intellectual structure and the trends on the marketing and sustainability research field are answered. The analysis of these results provides a research framework which is inferred into a research agenda for digital marketing and sustainability. This agenda is shown in the discussion. Finally, the study’s limitations are pointed out.

2. Methodology

Research in digital marketing and sustainability is very scarce (less than 30 research works on the web of science). This shortage in research has conditioned the methodology used for the creation of a digital marketing and sustainability research agenda. The development of this agenda has been established in two stages. In the first stage, the goal consisted on showing the state of the art of the marketing and sustainability research. For that purpose, a bibliometric method based in co-citations has been used. In a second stage, these results are moved to the field of digital marketing and sustainability, creating an agenda in which the challenges faces by this field of research have been identified. The experience and the know-how of the researchers are used for that purpose.
Bibliometrics serves to know the current research and the new trends in a research field. The scientifically validated bibliometric method most used is co-citations analysis [19]. Co-citations analysis is able to identify the intellectual structure of a research field and answering matters about the field such as: which are the main research areas, the most active ones, the emerging trends; or the dissemination paths of the knowledge of the domain. This methodology shows two big advantages against others: (1) capability to analyse large amounts of work, (2) and avoiding general problems of subjectivity bias derived from the idiosyncrasies of the reviewers [20].
A co-citation is defined as the frequency at which two works are cited together [21]. Thus, two works are co-cited if they are included in the same document. The frequency at which this situation takes place will show the coupling force of the documents. When two works are cited together, they will probably have some related content, and the influence of the co-cited work in its research field will be bigger. This allows to know a field’s school of thought, as well as its interrelations [22].
Some of the most popular softwares to execute this kind of methodologies are: SciMAT, CiteSpace, VOSviewer, CitNetExplorer. These tools have their own advantages and disadvantages see [23]. CiteSpace has been used for this work. It is a detection and scientific visualization software based on Java that allows analysis of the critical changes produced in a research field [24,25]. Through this software, the co-citation networks which reveal the structure of a research field can be known [25].

Data

The construction of the data base was made through the selection of scientific journals papers from the Web of Science Core Collection; specifically, those papers included on the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). These databases were used because they include the areas of marketing and sustainability, as well as the main journals on these topics (e.g., Journal of Marketing, Sustainability). In addition, SSCI is the most relevant database in bibliometric studies due to its greater coverage, compared to other databases (Scopus or Google Scholar), as well as those most used by researchers in this area [19]. Papers containing the terms “sustainab*” and “marketing” in the title, on the abstract, or on the keywords, were selected. Thus, 2136 publications were obtained. Most of these publications belonged to the areas of Business, Management, and Environmental Studies.
The analysis was developed from 2009 until 2018 (both included) because of different reasons: (i) this period concentrates 88.81% of all the field publications; (ii) because 2009 is the first year when more than 50 papers relating marketing and sustainability were published; and (iii) in order to obtain an integral vision of the evolution and the trends experienced during the last decade by the research field.
The number of papers published in this subject during the 2009–2018 period was 1897, with 89,118 valid references which formed the data sample for the analysis. For the data analysis the following parameters were used in CiteSpace: (1) timeslice from 2009 to 2018 (slice length = 1 year); (2) term source = each bibliographic record contains four textual fields. These fields provide unstructured text that can be processed and analyzed as part of a visual analytic process. The title/abstract/author keywords/keywords plus has been used for the analysis; (3) node type = Indicates the type of network selected for the analysis. In this case cited reference is used, the networks are made of co-cited references; (4) pruning = none; (5) selection criteria = the way to sample records to form the final networks, g-index (k = 5) is used.

3. Results

In recent decades, the research flow relating to marketing fields and sustainability has experienced a remarkable increase from 7 publications in 1998, to more than 300 publications since 2017. In this growth process, the increase produced during 2009 and 2015 are particularly important, where the number of publications increases a 57.14% and 104.89%, respectively. All of this shows the transformation of the field in a research stream that is interesting for researchers. Below are the results showing the intellectual structure and trends in marketing and sustainability (2009–2018), from which it is inferred a research agenda in digital marketing and sustainability.

3.1. Main Research Areas in Marketing and Sustainability

The main research areas in marketing and sustainability during the 2009–2018 period are shown on Table 1. It shows 9 big research areas sufficiently different between them (Modularity Q = 0.7024). The number of nodes of these 9 clusters accounts for 81.87% of the total (160 nodes and 257 links). In turn, clusters show high degree of homogeneity between the components forming each cluster (Silhouette values > 0.757) [25].
The higher area of research is cluster #1. It has the higher number of members referenced (27). It reveals that most of the research about marketing and sustainability has focused on studying the sustainability strategies in the form of a customer and other stakeholders value proposition [26,27,28]. In the search for understanding which are the sustainability drivers and how it can be implemented [9,29], the researchers of this cluster demonstrate that generating a value represents one of the main sustainability drivers [30,31,32]. They suggest that organizations should develop a customer-centric approach to sustainability to get a higher sustainability level, focusing on the values, rules, habits [33] and customers’ individual features [34]. This is motivated by the appearance of a consumer mindset of caring for self, for community, and for nature [35,36], which has resulted in segments of ethically-oriented consumers [12]. The mean year of the publication of the documents concerning this cluster is 2010.
The second biggest research area (cluster #2) is related to green marketing management. Researchers ask themselves about the way green marketing tools influence the consumer’s purchase intention. They particularly analyses the influence of eco-labels on the consumers purchase behavior [8,37] and reveal the moderating effect that consumer confidence exerts [38,39]. The mean year of the publication of documents concerning this cluster is 2011. This cluster represents the emerging front and hotspot in the current marketing and sustainability domain (mean year 2011).
The third biggest research area is about the sustainable values–action gap. [40]. In this cluster, the researchers ask themselves why some costumers buy green products, while other customers who support this do not consume them [14,41]. They develop patterns and suggest factors that influence this gap such as: the dedicated required time to be green [42], the moral maturity, the age, the purchase by inertia, the personal limitations, a negative perception about the green product’s image or quality, a complete denial of responsibility, and questioning about the individual impact’s that can be achieved [7].
Next cluster focuses on the competitive advantage (cluster #4). In this area, researchers examine the connection between the environmental marketing strategies and the business results [43]. They ask themselves whether the strategies of sustainability are a competitive advantage that influence business results [44]. In this way, they point out the need to develop sustainable business models capable of implementing sustainable innovations [45,46].
On cluster #5, the interest focuses on exploring why consumers, companies and governments have had difficulties tackling environmental matters [47]. Researchers notice that society sometimes does not change until it finds itself in a vulnerable situation [43,48]. Besides, they detect that environmental concern largely depends on several aspects, such as: political regulation, funding support for the farmers, national labelling system, the level of the post-materialist culture and environmental concern [49]. In pursuit of possible solutions to obtain a sustainable society [11] they suggest transformations in green marketing execution [50].
On cluster #6, the sustainable supply chain is investigated. The role of the marketing on the supply chain is explored in order to obtain the sustainability goals [51,52].
On cluster #7, researchers explore sustainable behavior in travel. They particularly ask themselves how do sustainability actions influence on current travel performance. For example, how are perceived the reduction measures in contamination that imply limitations in the use of vehicles, [53] or which is the environmental impact’s effect of air transport on customers behavior [54,55,56]. Studies in this field suggest that the attitudes of the individuals transcend their personal features. This has been useful to provide a way to extract homogeneous groups for the design of transport policies [57,58].
On cluster #8, the connection between consumers’ environmental values and product purchasing behavior are investigated. Researchers in this area ask themselves what are the values and lifestyles that explain in a better way the respectful behavior with the environment [59]. They highlight the importance of the ethical and environmental dimension on product choice [60]. They also point out the correlation between pro-environmental beliefs of the consumers in general and their confidence in the performance of green products [61]
The last interesting big area treats the effect of marketing capabilities for sustainability. The researchers explore the marketing capabilities as a precedent of: corporate environmental commitment [62], sustainability based on innovation [63], and sustainable consumption [64].

3.2. Intellectual Turning Points

The intellectual turning points are research works that connect different research areas and shape the spinal column of a research field. It makes them essential works for the study of a research field. This means that a large number of researchers see these publications as an intellectual resource [65]. When a work obtains a betweenness centrality higher than 0.10, it can be considered an intellectual turning point. During the analysis period, 18 turning points appear in this field (betweenness centrality > 0.10).
The research areas that spread the most knowledge and have the most intellectual turning points in marketing and sustainability research areas are clusters #1 and #4 (Figure 1). The research about sustainability as a value proposition is the most centric one in the field of marketing and sustainability. Apart from gathering the highest number of intellectual turning points, this area is closely connected to an other five research fields (#2, #3, #4, #5 and #6). The connection between sustainability as a value proposition and green marketing is materialized in the works “Mindful consumption: a customer-centric approach to sustainability” [35] (#1) and “Investigation of green marketing tools effect on consumers purchase behavior” [66] (#2). A large proportion of green marketing researchers use these works in conjunction as an intellectual source of their research.
The connection between sustainability as a value proposition and sustainable values–action gap is inferred from the joint use as intellectual source, by cluster #3 researchers, of the works: “The sustainability liability: potential negative effects of ethicality on product preference” [30] (#1); and “Sustainable consumption: Opportunities for consumer research and public policy” [67] (#1), with the work “Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation“ [14] (#3).
Research about sustainability as a value proposition and competitive advantage are mainly connected by the “Green marketing strategies: an examination of stakeholders and the opportunities they present” [26] (#1) with the “Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda” [45] (#4) and “Building understanding of the domain of consumer vulnerability” [68] (#4).
Sustainability as value proposition and the difficulties by society in addressing environmental issues connect in the works of Sheth, Sethia, & Srinivas [35] (#1) about the mindful consumption and the work “Sustainable market orientation: a new approach to managing marketing strategy” [47] (#5).
The supply chain research is the last big connecting link to cluster #1. It arises as a consequence of the joint use, as an intellectual source, of the works “Market-oriented sustainability: a conceptual framework and propositions” [9] (#1) and “Sustainability and business-to-business marketing: A framework and implications“ [52] (#6).
Research about sustainability strategies as a competitive advantage is the second most centric area in the field of marketing and sustainability. This area is closely connected to the other five research fields (#1, #5, #7, #8 and #9). In addition to the connection that presents sustainability as a value proposition (#1), it is also strongly connected to clusters #5, #7 and #8 by means of the work “Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction?” [69] (#4). This work has been widely used as a research source together with: the work of Mitchell, Wooliscroft, and Highman [47] about sustainable market orientation (#5); the report about “Motivating Sustainable Consumption a review of evidence on consumer behavior and behavioral change” [70] (#7); and the work “Pro-environmental products: marketing influence on consumer purchase decision “ [61] (#8).
The effect of the marketing capabilities for sustainability (#9) is mainly connected to research about sustainability strategies as competitive advantage (#4). In this case, one of the strongest connections are produced between the work of Bon and Lüdeke-Freund [45] with “Is Market Orientation a Source of Sustainable Competitive Advantage or Simply the Cost of Competing?” [71] (#9).
Finally, there are also strong connections between the research about the sustainable values-action gap (#3) with the green value chain studies (#6) and the pro-environmental beliefs (#8). It arises between the work “Beyond ecolabels: what green marketing can learn from conventional marketing” [13] (#3) with the work of Sharma et al. [52] about sustainability and business-to-business marketing, and the work of Pickett-Baker and Ozaki [61], about pro-environmental products, respectively.

3.3. Most Active Areas of Research in Marketing and Sustainability

Previously, it has been shown which are the main marketing and sustainability research areas during the 2009–2018 period. It has been also shown the works through which these research areas are connected. At this point, it must be asked which works have gained an extraordinary level of attention from the scientific community during this period? Which research works have been extraordinarily cited?
The burst rate is an indicator that allows to measure the influence of a work in the community during a specific period of time [72]. This indicator shows two features: the intensity and the explosion duration. Table 2 recognizes the top 20 works containing the biggest citation bursts in the area of marketing and sustainability during 2019–2018.
The top ranked item by bursts is “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing” [73]. In this work, the paradigm shift is promoted towards a marketing focused on the service by implementing skills and abilities resulting in a higher profit for consumers. The second article that emerged during burst detection analysis is “Benchmarking Marketing Capabilities for Sustainable Competitive Advantage” [74]. In this work, benchmarking potential is examined as a learning mechanism to develop marketing capabilities that allow sustainable competitive advantage to be gained. The third most important work by bursts is authored by Sharma et al. [52]. The authors recognize three strategies in which the role of marketing in environmental sustainability is essential to obtain competitive advantages. The forth is the work by Peattie and Peattie [69] about the potential of the social marketing perspective to contribute to consumption reduction. Finally, the fifth strongest work by citation bursts in this area is authored by Pickett-Baker and Ozaki [61]. This paper shows a correlation between consumer confidence in the performance of green products and their pro-environmental beliefs in general. It also shows that it is difficult for consumers to recognize greener products easily.
In terms of the literature source, these papers were published primarily by the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (4 papers), the Journal of Marketing (3 papers), the Journal of Business Strategy and the Environment (2 papers), and the Journal of Macromarketing (2 papers). Further on, the mean time a burst paper takes to burst since it is published until it starts its highest interest period, is 4.45 years. While the mean time of maximum activity of burst papers in this area is 1.95 years.

3.4. Emerging Trends of the Marketing and Sustainability Domain

Marketing research and sustainability trends follow five main lines. Three of them are related to the value proposition of sustainability (#1) for the clients. Another one is related to the effect of capabilities of marketing (#9); and the last one is related to the use of green marketing (#2). The research fronts of a domain can be detected through analyzing recent literature with high burst rates [22]. In this case, at the end of Table 2 can be seen the research forming the emerging trends in the field of marketing and sustainability. These are researches that have recently (2018) raised great interest among researchers from this field.
The most interesting research line in the field of marketing and sustainability is about the study of the cognitive, motivational and structural factors and processes that threaten sustainability, with the goal of better understanding and promoting the pro-environmental behavior [29]. In this way, Leonidou and Leonidou [5] and Peattie [33] point out the need to better know the process through which the clients appreciate and feel self-satisfied with green products.
Another emerging trend in this field consists in examining the effects of market orientation [71] on sustainability results [75,76].
Finally, research of the effect of green marketing tools (e.g., eco-brand) on consumers’ purchase behavior [66] is also a trend.

4. Discussion, Conclusions and Limitations

There is a shortage in digital marketing and sustainability works. However, digital marketing is essential to save the gap between markets and companies [1]. The combination of these factors suggests the need to create a research agenda for this field.
Bibliometrics allows us to improve the comprehension of a research field. In this work it has been identified as the current main research areas in marketing and sustainability, the cornerstones around which the main disclosure paths meet, the works that have extraordinary attracted the attention of the scientific community and the emerging trends. The analysis of these results has allowed us to create an agenda that shows the main challenges for the field of digital marketing and sustainability.
This research answers “what can digital marketing do for sustainability?”, showing the main research challenges in this field. Six big challenges have been found for researchers in digital marketing and sustainability: (1) customer orientation and value proposition; (2) digital consumer behavior; (3) digital green marketing; (4) competitive advantage; (5) supply chain; and (6) capabilities. These challenges are inferred from the result of a previous analysis of the current situation of the field of marketing and sustainability.
Challenge 1: customer orientation and value proposition. One of the main topics for the development of sustainability consists in knowing better what do customers value from products and sustainable companies [9,67]. Technological advances, particularly the internet [77], have benefited the appearance of a large amount of metrics that can be oriented to gain a better knowledge of the customers. Metrics allow us to define indicators that are able to determine the assessment of sustainability from customers and other stakeholders. What is more, there is great interest in knowing better the individual features, values, rules and habits of the consumers who are aware of their health, community and nature [35]. Researchers can establish models that explain the metric related to this kind of behavior. Are there digital unique metrics acting as a global metric capable of representing the characteristics of the socially-concerned consumers? Which consumer’s characteristics benefit the sustainability legitimacy on society [78]? They can also try to determine the existence of moderating effects between the use of a digital pro-sustainability communications and the consumer’s perceived value. Furthermore, academics can demonstrate digital strategies that enhance the consumer experience [79] and promote sustainability. For example, it has been suggested that strategies based on mobile augmented reality (AR) apps may improve the level of satisfaction, quality and experience of consumers while representing a way to achieve sustainability [80].
Challenge 2: digital consumer behavior. Sustainability is a trigger for consumer commitment and therefore an aspect to be taken into account by digital marketing [16]. Related to the existing gap between socially-concerned consumers who buy green products, against those one who do not buy them [7,42] it asks: which digital marketing actions benefit this purchase behavior? What is the connection between consumers environmental values and the digital purchase behavior? instead, which values explain better the digital purchase behaviors of the green products? Which digital purchase behavior benefits green products purchase? Are companies encouraging online customer education? [81]
Challenge 3: digital green marketing. Another subject of interest is related to the green marketing management in digital environments [38,39]. For example, how do green marketing tools influence digital environments about the consumers’ purchase intention? This can be particularly relevant in the most contaminated sectors and those with a higher number of consumers, such as the passenger transport [54,56]. Are companies promoting green activism in their social networks? [81] Does digital marketing develop social culture campaigns on social networks? What effect has the use of eco-labels in digital environments on the purchase behavior, the satisfaction or the consumers’ fidelity? Is it suitable to dedicate digital spaces to the eco-labels in order to benefit the green products purchase?
Challenge 4: competitive advantage. Sustainability has turned into a competitive advantage for the companies [43]. Sustainability generates trust towards the company [16]. Does digital marketing apply sustainability to establish strong relationships with its stakeholders? [81] Researchers can determine which digital marketing strategies are the most effective to make sustainability a competitive advantage. In this way, there is also a need to investigate: Which digital marketing strategies benefit the appearance of sustainable business models? Furthermore, what transformation may offer digital marketing the chance to create a more sustainable society?
Challenge 5: supply chain. Supply chain management is basic for sustainability goals’ fulfilment [15]. At this point, researchers can answer to: What is the role played by digital marketing over the supply chain to obtain sustainability goals? For example, how can digital marketing influence on reducing the consumption in the supply chain? How can smart technology and media improve the sustainability of industry or households? [82]. Along these lines, emerging applications such as AR are being useful in the tourism sector, enhancing the visitor experience and at the same time preserving historical architecture or art [83].
Challenge 6: capabilities. Finally, as the capabilities of marketing can benefit sustainable attitudes inside organizations [63,64], it may be asked to what extent digital marketing capabilities benefit this kind of attitude. Which digital capabilities and skills are more beneficial for sustainability and should be taught [84]? How does digital innovation influence environmental commitment?
This research shows several limitations. On the one hand, the work faces the limitations of bibliometric methods based on citations [22]: (i) citations take time to accumulate, therefore there is a bias towards older articles, due to the existing time gap between the moment when the paper is published to when it is cited; (ii) citation-based metrics could be biased due to author self-citation; (iii) the scope of the data is limited by the source of the retrieval (Web of Science) and the composite query used (marketing and sustainability). On the other hand, the development of a research agenda is subjective to the researcher’s criteria. In order to reduce this subjectivity, the authors have based this work on previous quantitative results. Another limitation that has marked this research has been the shortage in digital marketing and sustainability works in the main scientific data bases.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.D.-M., A.B.-G. and C.P.-R.; methodology, F.D.-M., A.B.-G. and C.P.-R.; formal analysis, F.D.-M., A.B.-G.; investigation, F.D.-M., A.B.-G. and C.P.-R.; data curation, F.D.-M., A.B.-G. and C.P.-R.; writing—original draft preparation, F.D.-M. and A.B.-G.; writing—review and editing, F.D.-M., A.B.-G. and C.P.-R.; supervision, C.P.-R.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

We thank Luis Díez for insightful comments and suggestions on previous drafts. During the completion of the paper we also benefited from discussions at research seminars at Fundacion Camilo Prado and European Academy of Management and Business Economics International Conference.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Day, G.S. Closing the Marketing Capabilities Gap. J. Mark. 2011, 75, 183–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Leeflang, P.S.H.; Verhoef, P.C.; Dahlström, P.; Freundt, T. Challenges and solutions for marketing in a digital era. Eur. Manag. J. 2014, 32, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Jones, P.; Clarke-Hill, C.; Comfort, D.; Hillier, D. Marketing and sustainability. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2008, 26, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. McDonagh, P.; Prothero, A. Sustainability marketing research: Past, present and future. J. Mark. Manag. 2014, 30, 1186–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Leonidou, C.N.; Leonidou, L.C. Research into environmental marketing/management: A bibliographic analysis. Eur. J. Mark. 2011, 45, 68–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pagiaslis, A.; Krontalis, A.K. Green Consumption Behavior Antecedents: Environmental Concern, Knowledge, and Beliefs. Psychol. Mark. 2014, 31, 335–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bray, J.; Johns, N.; Kilburn, D. An Exploratory Study into the Factors Impeding Ethical Consumption. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 98, 597–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Atkinson, L.; Rosenthal, S. Signaling the Green Sell: The Influence of Eco-Label Source, Argument Specificity, and Product Involvement on Consumer Trust. J. Advert. 2014, 43, 33–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Crittenden, V.L.; Crittenden, W.F.; Ferrell, L.K.; Ferrell, O.C.; Pinney, C.C. Market-oriented sustainability: A conceptual framework and propositions. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 71–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2008, 36, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Varey, R.J. Marketing Means and Ends for a Sustainable Society: A Welfare Agenda for Transformative Change. J. Macromarket. 2010, 30, 112–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. De Pelsmacker, P.; Driesen, L.; Rayp, G. Do Consumers Care about Ethics? Willingness to Pay for Fair-Trade Coffee. J. Consum. Aff. 2005, 39, 363–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Rex, E.; Baumann, H. Beyond ecolabels: What green marketing can learn from conventional marketing. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 567–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Griskevicius, V.; Tybur, J.M.; Van den Bergh, B. Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2010, 98, 392–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Linton, J.; Klassen, R.; Jayaraman, V. Sustainable supply chains: An introduction. J. Oper. Manag. 2007, 25, 1075–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Alvarez-Milán, A.; Felix, R.; Rauschnabel, P.A.; Hinsch, C. Strategic customer engagement marketing: A decision making framework. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 92, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ramos-Rodríguez, A.-R.; Ruíz-Navarro, J. Changes in the intellectual structure of strategic management research: A bibliometric study of the Strategic Management Journal, 1980–2000. Strateg. Manag. J. 2004, 25, 981–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M.; Martínez, M.Á.; Moral-Munoz, J.A.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Cobo, M.J. Some bibliometric procedures for analyzing and evaluating research fields. Appl. Intell. 2018, 48, 1275–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zupic, I.; Cater, T. Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organ. Res. Methods 2015, 18, 429–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Pascual-Nebreda, L.; Díez-Martín, F.; Prado-Román, C. The Intellectual Structure of the American Behavioral Scientist: Five Decades of Research. Am. Behav. Sci. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Small, H. Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 1973, 24, 265–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hou, J.; Yang, X.; Chen, C. Emerging trends and new developments in information science: A document co-citation analysis (2009–2016). Scientometrics 2018, 115, 869–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F. Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2011, 62, 1382–1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Chen, C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2006, 57, 359–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Chen, C.; Ibekwe-SanJuan, F.; Hou, J. The Structure and Dynamics of Co-Citation Clusters: A Multiple-Perspective Co-Citation Analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2010, 61, 1386–1409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Cronin, J.J.; Smith, J.S.; Gleim, M.R.; Ramirez, E.; Martinez, J.D. Green marketing strategies: An examination of stakeholders and the opportunities they present. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 158–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Connelly, B.L.; Ketchen, D.J.; Slater, S.F. Toward a “theoretical toolbox” for sustainability research in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 86–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Green, T.; Peloza, J. How does corporate social responsibility create value for consumers? J. Consum. Mark. 2011, 28, 48–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Steg, L.; Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 2009, 29, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Luchs, M.G.; Naylor, R.W.; Irwin, J.R.; Raghunathan, R. The Sustainability Liability: Potential Negative Effects of Ethicality on Product Preference. J. Mark. 2010, 74, 18–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Auger, P.; Devinney, T.M.; Louviere, J.J.; Burke, P.F. Do social product features have value to consumers? Int. J. Res. Mark. 2008, 25, 183–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tynan, C.; McKechnie, S.; Chhuon, C. Co-creating value for luxury brands. J. Bus. Res. 2010, 63, 1156–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Peattie, K. Green Consumption: Behavior and Norms. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2010, 35, 195–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Gupta, S.; Ogden, D.T. To buy or not to buy? A social dilemma perspective on green buying. J. Consum. Mark. 2009, 26, 376–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Sheth, J.N.; Sethia, N.K.; Srinivas, S. Mindful consumption: A customer-centric approach to sustainability. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 21–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kotler, P. Reinventing Marketing to Manage the Environmental Imperative. J. Mark. 2011, 75, 132–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Delmas, M.A.; Grant, L.E. Eco-Labeling Strategies and Price-Premium. Bus. Soc. 2014, 53, 6–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Chen, Y.; Chang, C. Enhance green purchase intentions. Manag. Decis. 2012, 50, 502–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chen, Y.-S. The Drivers of Green Brand Equity: Green Brand Image, Green Satisfaction, and Green Trust. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 93, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Auger, P.; Devinney, T.M. Do What Consumers Say Matter? The Misalignment of Preferences with Unconstrained Ethical Intentions. J. Bus. Ethics 2007, 76, 361–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Carrington, M.J.; Neville, B.A.; Whitwell, G.J. Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 2759–2767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Young, W.; Hwang, K.; McDonald, S.; Oates, C.J. Sustainable consumption: Green consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 18, 20–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Baker, W.E.; Sinkula, J.M. Environmental Marketing Strategy and Firm Performance: Effects on New Product Performance and Market Share. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2005, 33, 461–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Baumgartner, R.J.; Ebner, D. Corporate sustainability strategies: Sustainability profiles and maturity levels. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 18, 76–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Boons, F.; Lüdeke-Freund, F. Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 45, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Bocken, N.M.P.; Short, S.W.; Rana, P.; Evans, S. A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 65, 42–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Mitchell, R.W.; Wooliscroft, B.; Higham, J. Sustainable Market Orientation: A New Approach to Managing Marketing Strategy. J. Macromarket. 2010, 30, 160–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Baker, S.M.; Hunt, D.M.; Rittenburg, T.L. Consumer Vulnerability as a Shared Experience: Tornado Recovery Process in Wright, Wyoming. J. Public Policy Mark. 2007, 26, 6–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Thøgersen, J. Country Differences in Sustainable Consumption: The Case of Organic Food. J. Macromarketing 2010, 30, 171–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Polonsky, M.J. Transformative green marketing: Impediments and opportunities. J. Bus. Res. 2011, 64, 1311–1319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Liu, S.; Kasturiratne, D.; Moizer, J. A hub-and-spoke model for multi-dimensional integration of green marketing and sustainable supply chain management. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2012, 41, 581–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sharma, A.; Iyer, G.R.; Mehrotra, A.; Krishnan, R. Sustainability and business-to-business marketing: A framework and implications. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2010, 39, 330–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Dickinson, J.E.; Dickinson, J.A. Local Transport and Social Representations: Challenging the Assumptions for Sustainable Tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2006, 14, 192–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Graham, B.; Shaw, J. Low-cost airlines in Europe: Reconciling liberalization and sustainability. Geoforum 2008, 39, 1439–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Gössling, S.; Peeters, P. “It Does Not Harm the Environment!” An Analysis of Industry Discourses on Tourism, Air Travel and the Environment. J. Sustain. Tour. 2007, 15, 402–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Becken, S. Tourists’ Perception of International Air Travel’s Impact on the Global Climate and Potential Climate Change Policies. J. Sustain. Tour. 2007, 15, 351–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Anable, J. “Complacent Car Addicts” or “Aspiring Environmentalists”? Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory. Transp. Policy 2005, 12, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Barr, S.; Gilg, A. Sustainable lifestyles: Framing environmental action in and around the home. Geoforum 2006, 37, 906–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Fraj, E.; Martinez, E. Environmental values and lifestyles as determining factors of ecological consumer behaviour: An empirical analysis. J. Consum. Mark. 2006, 23, 133–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Rokka, J.; Uusitalo, L. Preference for green packaging in consumer product choices—Do consumers care? Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2008, 32, 516–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Pickett-Baker, J.; Ozaki, R. Pro-environmental products: Marketing influence on consumer purchase decision. J. Consum. Mark. 2008, 25, 281–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hirunyawipada, T.; Xiong, G. Corporate environmental commitment and financial performance: Moderating effects of marketing and operations capabilities. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 86, 22–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kamboj, S.; Rahman, Z. Market orientation, marketing capabilities and sustainable innovation. Manag. Res. Rev. 2017, 40, 698–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mariadoss, B.J.; Tansuhaj, P.S.; Mouri, N. Marketing capabilities and innovation-based strategies for environmental sustainability: An exploratory investigation of B2B firms. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2011, 40, 1305–1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Chen, C.; Chen, Y.; Horowitz, M.; Hou, H.; Liu, Z.; Pellegrino, D. Towards an Explanatory and Computational Theory of Scientific Discovery. J. Informetr. 2009, 3, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Rahbar, E.; Abdul Wahid, N. Investigation of green marketing tools’ effect on consumers’ purchase behavior. Bus. Strateg. Ser. 2011, 12, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Prothero, A.; Dobscha, S.; Freund, J.; Kilbourne, W.E.; Luchs, M.G.; Ozanne, L.K.; Thøgersen, J. Sustainable Consumption: Opportunities for Consumer Research and Public Policy. J. Public Policy Mark. 2011, 30, 31–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Baker, S.M.; Gentry, J.W.; Rittenburg, T.L. Building Understanding of the Domain of Consumer Vulnerability. J. Macromarket. 2005, 25, 128–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Peattie, K.; Peattie, S. Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction? J. Bus. Res. 2009, 62, 260–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Jackson, T.; Begg, K.; Darnton, A.; Davey, A.; Dobson, A.; Ekins, P.; Garnett, T.; Gatersleben, B.; Hallsworth, A.; Holdsworth, M.; et al. Motivating Sustainable Consumption a Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural Change; University of Surrey: Guildford, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  71. Kumar, V.; Jones, E.; Venkatesan, R.; Leone, R.P. Is Market Orientation a Source of Sustainable Competitive Advantage or Simply the Cost of Competing? J. Mark. 2011, 75, 16–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Kim, M.C.; Chen, C. A scientometric review of emerging trends and new developments in recommendation systems. Scientometrics 2015, 104, 239–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. J. Mark. 2004, 68, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Vorhies, D.W.; Morgan, N.A. Benchmarking Marketing Capabilities for Sustainable Competitive Advantage. J. Mark. 2005, 69, 80–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Cheah, S.; Ho, Y.-P.; Li, S. Business Model Innovation for Sustainable Performance in Retail and Hospitality Industries. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Blasco López, M.F.; Recuero Virto, N.; Aldas Manzano, J.; Garcia-Madariaga, J. Tourism sustainability in archaeological sites. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 8, 276–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Jiménez, N.; San-Martín, S. Attitude toward m-advertising and m-repurchase. Eur. Res. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2017, 23, 96–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Díez-de-Castro, E.; Peris-Ortiz, M.; Díez-Martín, F. Criteria for Evaluating the Organizational Legitimacy: A Typology for Legitimacy Jungle. In Organizational Legitimacy; Diez-de-Castro, E., Peris-Ortiz, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Germany, 2018; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  79. Liberato, P.; Alen, E.; Liberato, D. Smart tourism destination triggers consumer experience: The case of Porto. Eur. J. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2018, 27, 6–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Rauschnabel, P.A.; Felix, R.; Hinsch, C. Augmented reality marketing: How mobile AR-apps can improve brands through inspiration. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 49, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Felix, R.; Rauschnabel, P.A.; Hinsch, C. Elements of strategic social media marketing: A holistic framework. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 70, 118–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Rauschnabel, P.A.; Ro, Y.K. Augmented reality smart glasses: An investigation of technology acceptance drivers. Int. J. Technol. Mark. 2016, 11, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Dieck, T.M.C.; Jung, T. A theoretical model of mobile augmented reality acceptance in urban heritage tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2018, 21, 154–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Diez-Martin, F. Dónde estamos: Una introducción a la educación en los negocios. J. Manag. Bus. Educ. 2018, 1, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
Sustainability 11 02839 g001 550
Figure 1. Marketing and sustainability intellectual turning points (2009–2018). (the color of the circle shows the membership cluster).
Figure 1. Marketing and sustainability intellectual turning points (2009–2018). (the color of the circle shows the membership cluster).
Sustainability 11 02839 g001
Table
Table 1. Main research areas in marketing and sustainability.
Table 1. Main research areas in marketing and sustainability.
ClusterSizeSilhouetteMean (Year)Label
#1270.7572010Customer value proposition
#2260.7712011Green marketing
#3200.8522009Sustainable values–action gap
#4160.8542006Competitive advantage
#5130.9512007Sustainable society
#6120.9342008Supply chain
#770.9832006Travel behavior
#850.9472007Pro-environmental beliefs
#950.9752008Marketing capabilities
Table
Table 2. Burst papers in the marketing and sustainability field.
Table 2. Burst papers in the marketing and sustainability field.
ClusterReferencesYearStrengthBeginEnd2009–2018
9VORHIES DW, 2005, J MARKETING, V69, P8020056,365920092013▃▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂
4ANJA S, 2005, J MACROMARKETING, V25, P7620053,209820092011▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
-ALLEN P, 2003, J RURAL STUD, V19, P6120032,789420102011▂▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂▂
5VARGO SL, 2004, J MARKETING, V68, P120048,362220102012▂▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂▂
3PEATTIE K, 2009, J BUS RES, V62, P26020095,262820112014▂▂▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂
3BAKER WE, 2005, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V33, P46120052,942520112013▂▂▃▃▃▂▂▂▂▂
4VAREY RJ, 2010, J MACROMARKETING, V30, P11220103,395820112014▂▂▃▃▃▃▂▂▂▂
5SHARMA A, 2010, IND MARKET MANAG, V39, P33020105,530920122014▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂▂▂
2ALBINO V, 2009, BUS STRATEG ENVIRON, V18, P8320092,911920122013▂▂▂▃▃▂▂▂▂▂
2REX E, 2007, J CLEAN PROD, V15, P56720073,469720132015▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂▂
0CHABOWSKI BR, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P5520112,586720132014▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂▂▂
4CHAMORRO A, 2009, BUS STRATEG ENVIRON, V18, P22320092,946120142016▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂
8PICKETT-BAKER J, 2008, J CONSUM MARK, V25, P28120085,052420142016▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃▂▂
0CONNELLY BL, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P8620113,663720142015▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂▂
1HULT GTM, 2011, J ACAD MARKET SCI, V39, P120114,930020152016▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▂▂
0LEONIDOU CN, 2011, EUR J MARKETING, V45, P6820114,336120162018▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃
0STEG L, 2009, J ENVIRON PSYCHOL, V29, P30920094,703420162018▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃
0PEATTIE K, 2010, ANNU REV ENV RESOUR, V35, P19520103,969720162018▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃
9KUMAR V, 2011, J MARKETING, V75, P1620114,703420162018▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃
1RAHBAR E, 2011, BUSINESS STRATEGY SERIES, V12, P7320113,969720162018▂▂▂▂▂▂▂▃▃▃
Note: track line represent the burst length during the period of study.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Diez-Martin, F.; Blanco-Gonzalez, A.; Prado-Roman, C. Research Challenges in Digital Marketing: Sustainability. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102839

AMA Style

Diez-Martin F, Blanco-Gonzalez A, Prado-Roman C. Research Challenges in Digital Marketing: Sustainability. Sustainability. 2019; 11(10):2839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102839

Chicago/Turabian Style

Diez-Martin, Francisco, Alicia Blanco-Gonzalez, and Camilo Prado-Roman. 2019. "Research Challenges in Digital Marketing: Sustainability" Sustainability 11, no. 10: 2839. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102839

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop